WASHINGTON — When U.S. ground forces attack Saddam Hussein's regime in Baghdad — as early as several days from now — they should have a good idea about how Iraq will wage what could be the war's decisive battle.
Smoke rises in the distance as Iraqis sell vegetables at the market in a suburb of Baghdad on Monday. By Jerome Delay, AP
Judging from the first six days of fighting, Iraqi soldiers seem to have learned well the lessons of the Persian Gulf War in 1991 and will choose carefully when and where to engage American troops. Iraq has demonstrated a keen understanding of guerrilla tactics by hitting U.S. forces where they are weakest, along a strung-out and vulnerable supply line that stretches almost 300 miles, from central Iraq to Kuwait.
Saddam's most loyal troops probably hope to force the United States into a grinding and bloody war of attrition in or near the city of 5 million people. If the Iraqis can inflict significant allied casualties while luring coalition forces into killing civilians, the resulting TV images could further inflame world opinion against the invasion. The Iraqis might not be able to beat the mightiest armed force on the planet, but they might hope for a political victory.
Elements of that strategy are already visible. Sunday, Iraqi forces in An Nasiriyah killed up to 16 Americans and captured five others in the war's most deadly day of combat. The U.S. forces died in an ambush of a lost Army convoy and an assault on Marines who thought Iraqis intended to surrender. Analysts say skirmishes like these won't deter the American and British march on Baghdad — or cost the allies the ultimate victory — but some say they demonstrate several key vulnerabilities in the U.S. war plan. "I think the Iraqis have out-thought us on this," says W. Patrick Lang, a retired Army colonel and former professor of Arabic at West Point. "They have learned from their experience of 12 years ago. They are not going to stand up and blaze away — they will be the Indians."
In 1991, the Iraqis arrayed themselves in the desert and made themselves easy targets for U.S. tanks and warplanes. This time, they have dispersed much of their force, and though they have ringed Baghdad with elite Republican Guard units, they have also shown a willingness to retreat into populated areas, where U.S. forces might have to kill civilians to root out military units.
U.S. forces have no desire to be drawn into an uncontrolled street fight inside Baghdad and may not even attack the city proper on a large scale. In the days ahead, military sources and defense analysts say, look for American and British forces to attempt to destroy Saddam's Republican Guard on Baghdad's outskirts and to lay siege to Tikrit, Saddam's birthplace about 100 miles north of Baghdad.
Nearly half of all airstrikes against Iraq since the war started have been aimed at Republican Guard targets, a sign of the next major objective. A big test for American forces could come south of Baghdad where the Republican Guard's Medina Division is dug in.
Maj. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, an operations officer on the Pentagon's Joint Staff, describes the Medina Division as "the linchpin" in Iraq's multilayered defenses. If U.S. forces can quickly destroy Saddam's most well-trained units, that will deflate his regime.
Military sources say the United States probably won't enter Baghdad en masse with a large ground force. Instead, the 3rd Infantry Division, 101st Airborne Division, elements of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force and a number of commando units will identify a small number of targets and go after them selectively after surrounding the city.
"I think you'll see a series of raids to secure key objectives," protecting vital resources such as power plants but destroying targets such as military command posts, a senior U.S. military official says. "We're not going to get into clearing Baghdad block by block."
It's clear that Iraq is prepared to fight unconventionally.
In southern Iraq, Saddam's forces have disguised themselves as civilians and pretended to surrender only to open fire. There are reports that fighters in civilian clothes have approached coalition troops behind women and children.
Ralph Peters, a retired Army officer and author of numerous books on modern warfare, says the U.S. military has performed well on the rapid march to Baghdad. But Peters worries that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has underestimated the number of troops required to take the capital and maintain control in southern Iraq.
"As impressive as it looks, Rumsfeld and company have tried to do this on the cheap. Military planners have argued from the outset that we need more heavy ground forces," Peters says.
Without another heavy tank division in place, Peters says, the Army's 3rd Infantry Division has had little time to rest, and U.S. forces have not left enough troops behind to guard rear areas in southern Iraq.
U.S. forces could face up to six Republican Guard divisions en route or immediately surrounding Baghdad. Together with the Special Republican Guard, which will probably be dispersed inside the capital, Saddam could field 80,000 to 100,000 hard-core defenders.
Rumsfeld and Central Command boss Gen. Tommy Franks have cautioned that the invasion is entering its most dangerous phase and that the United States could expect significant casualties. A fleet of Apache helicopters came under heavy fire early Monday while attacking Republican Guard units. Some say that fight will foreshadow the ferocity of Iraq's defense. One Apache was lost, and a rescue helicopter was turned back after a withering anti-aircraft barrage. Of the more than 30 Apaches that were sent out, every one had damage from ground fire.
Baghdad is one of the most heavily armed cities in the world, with more than 6,000 anti-aircraft batteries and surface-to-air missile sites. Though American ground troops raced across the desert to get near the city, they will take their time in assaulting the capital, according to military analysts and Pentagon sources. "We are going to make sure we do it right. We will cordon off the city, use some innovative approaches," Peters says.
"We are not going to engage in Stalingrad on the Euphrates," he says, alluding to the six-month World War II battle in which Soviet defenders took on the seemingly invincible German army inside the Russian city of Stalingrad and defeated them, turning the course of the war.
After nearly a week of war in Iraq, there is no indication that Saddam's most loyal troops have turned against the regime or decided to give up.
Nor is there any sign of popular revolt. With the U.S. Army only a few dozen miles from Baghdad, there is no indication that the invasion has spawned widespread upheaval in Iraq.
Lang says the Pentagon may have miscalculated the extent to which ordinary Iraqis would be willing to turn on Saddam.
"The assumption has been the Iraqis' desire to rid themselves of a tyrant would outweigh Iraqi nationalism and xenophobia," he says. "I've said repeatedly, they would not welcome us."
